now im lost ive googled for guides but just find people showing their settings(4.2ghz for example). this dont help much. i still have stock cooler and would like for atleast 3.4ghz. I tryd increasing from 133 to 140 and got 2.9ghz but after that trying to increase it to 143 or 145 will fail to boot windows.

so many settings. so many weird names.

so maybe one of you readers gt same board and similar setup can give some advise.

now im lost ive googled for guides but just find people showing their settings(4.2ghz for example). this dont help much. i still have stock cooler and would like for atleast 3.4ghz. I tryd increasing from 133 to 140 and got 2.9ghz but after that trying to increase it to 143 or 145 will fail to boot windows.

so many settings. so many weird names.

so maybe one of you readers gt same board and similar setup can give some advise.

thanks, that is the same guy i keep finding in different links. see he just has instructions to make it to 4.2ghz wich is too much for stock cooler. he didnt explain what each individual thing actually does. so people can do overclock knowing what each value actually means. not just copy another persons OC

thanks, that is the same guy i keep finding in different links. see he just has instructions to make it to 4.2ghz wich is too much for stock cooler. he didnt explain what each individual thing actually does. so people can do overclock knowing what each value actually means. not just copy another persons OC

[quote name='avioni' post='288266' date='Mar 24 2009, 09:20 AM']he didnt explain what each individual thing actually does. so people can do overclock knowing what each value actually means. not just copy another persons OC[/quote]

I understand what your saying. So, you will need to educate yourself, and research the fundamentals "the parameters" in the bios you may not understand. I think its going to be difficult to find an indepth step by step instructional tutorial for each parameter, and setting within the bios of a particular motherboard.

Here are some basic terms, and definitions.
[url="http://www.overclockersclub.com/pages/overclock_faq"]http://www.overclockersclub.com/pages/overclock_faq[/url]

Here is another more indepth look at the bios of the X58.
[url="http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/evga_x58_sli/6.htm"]http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/evga_x58_sli/6.htm[/url]

Here is a dedicated link to learn about fundamentals of memory, and timings.
[url="http://www.educypedia.be/computer/memoryram.htm"]http://www.educypedia.be/computer/memoryram.htm[/url]

If anyone else here can find additional info on the X58, I'm sure they'll contribute to this thread. Other than the fundamentals, overclocking is somewhat of an aquired skill that isn't formally laid out step by step.

Interesting, I didn't know EVGA has a "Dummy OC” BIOS setting" in the X58 bios that provides an 11% OC . Probably a gimmick to the experienced :laugh: .

[quote name='avioni' post='288266' date='Mar 24 2009, 09:20 AM']he didnt explain what each individual thing actually does. so people can do overclock knowing what each value actually means. not just copy another persons OC

I understand what your saying. So, you will need to educate yourself, and research the fundamentals "the parameters" in the bios you may not understand. I think its going to be difficult to find an indepth step by step instructional tutorial for each parameter, and setting within the bios of a particular motherboard.

If anyone else here can find additional info on the X58, I'm sure they'll contribute to this thread. Other than the fundamentals, overclocking is somewhat of an aquired skill that isn't formally laid out step by step.

Interesting, I didn't know EVGA has a "Dummy OC” BIOS setting" in the X58 bios that provides an 11% OC . Probably a gimmick to the experienced :laugh: .

thanks got 3.56ghz while keeping relative low temps. 3-4c over stock. also mem got to 1700mhz because i couldnt do stock 1600mhz with a 170mhz qpi. It was fairly simple to get to this point and i believe 3.7 maybe .8 can be achived with stock cooling. ive seen people report temps of high 70's im still on the mid 60's but iill just keep it here , no stresss needed. so thanks lots freddy =).

lol the dummy OC i tryd last night. it made a 3.4ghz OC but it blocks all the options in bios so you cant improve or matter of fact cant even see the settings in bios so u cant learn anything from it, on the OC it makes. Also the timming for ram where loose( as i noted in cpu-z and evga tool. So not a good OC. but still nice feature.

still quit impressed with the chip and the mobo upto now. low volt needed for good overclock. Compared to my other system 680i sli with q6600 G0 where for some reason I need high vcore to get past 3.2ghz.

thanks got 3.56ghz while keeping relative low temps. 3-4c over stock. also mem got to 1700mhz because i couldnt do stock 1600mhz with a 170mhz qpi. It was fairly simple to get to this point and i believe 3.7 maybe .8 can be achived with stock cooling. ive seen people report temps of high 70's im still on the mid 60's but iill just keep it here , no stresss needed. so thanks lots freddy =).

lol the dummy OC i tryd last night. it made a 3.4ghz OC but it blocks all the options in bios so you cant improve or matter of fact cant even see the settings in bios so u cant learn anything from it, on the OC it makes. Also the timming for ram where loose( as i noted in cpu-z and evga tool. So not a good OC. but still nice feature.

still quit impressed with the chip and the mobo upto now. low volt needed for good overclock. Compared to my other system 680i sli with q6600 G0 where for some reason I need high vcore to get past 3.2ghz.

^^^^ jejee no no man. its 50,44,50,52 at idle read by core temp these are the temps as right now im looking at them.
Normally while playing games , I playd since I did the OC: warhead, cod4 and gta4 the max temp it has seen is 69,64,69,70 Im also looking at this now in the log.

I know I didnt do a stress test with prime. I just never do. I just use the PC as I always do. Its about 10-15 hours a day powered ON. If i get error Or BSOD or any anomalie then I rework the situation. Maybe there is a benefit in running prime but hell I dont know about it. To me if it dont have a problem at what I normally do then it is GREAT.

^^^^ jejee no no man. its 50,44,50,52 at idle read by core temp these are the temps as right now im looking at them.

Normally while playing games , I playd since I did the OC: warhead, cod4 and gta4 the max temp it has seen is 69,64,69,70 Im also looking at this now in the log.

I know I didnt do a stress test with prime. I just never do. I just use the PC as I always do. Its about 10-15 hours a day powered ON. If i get error Or BSOD or any anomalie then I rework the situation. Maybe there is a benefit in running prime but hell I dont know about it. To me if it dont have a problem at what I normally do then it is GREAT.

Those temp are still high. You need a better cooler for that degree of OC. If your not going to get a better cooler, you should back that OC off, and test for stability. Your asking for problems with your approach.

Those temp are still high. You need a better cooler for that degree of OC. If your not going to get a better cooler, you should back that OC off, and test for stability. Your asking for problems with your approach.

actually this evga mobo came with a evga e-leet tuning utility. and while the temps in core "temp 0.98.1" read 50,50,49,49 the temps in the evga e-leet read 46,45,46,40 and it also has another temp calle just CPU wich reads 30c

actually this evga mobo came with a evga e-leet tuning utility. and while the temps in core "temp 0.98.1" read 50,50,49,49 the temps in the evga e-leet read 46,45,46,40 and it also has another temp calle just CPU wich reads 30c

Try using the latest version of Core Temp, 99.4 . It automatically detects Core i7 TJmax, or you can try Real Temp. Some people tend to think Real Temp is more accurate than any other monitor available. Personally, I don't see how that conclusion can be accurate either. This stems form the arbitrary data that Intel provides regarding TJunction. Each temp utility has its own standard of how to determine what is the correct TJunction. One thing is for sure, and that is Tcase temp @ maximum TDP. For your processor the data on that spec can be found on Intels site, and that temperature is Tcase I believe.

Try using the latest version of Core Temp, 99.4 . It automatically detects Core i7 TJmax, or you can try Real Temp. Some people tend to think Real Temp is more accurate than any other monitor available. Personally, I don't see how that conclusion can be accurate either. This stems form the arbitrary data that Intel provides regarding TJunction. Each temp utility has its own standard of how to determine what is the correct TJunction. One thing is for sure, and that is Tcase temp @ maximum TDP. For your processor the data on that spec can be found on Intels site, and that temperature is Tcase I believe.

an this is what i found on intel site.
Tcase 67.9°C
Max TDP 130 Watts
Core Voltage 0.800V-1.225V

isnt that just the factory clocks specifications? what does it have to do with the actual numbers i see in core temp. I mean tdp on intel is 130w and in coretemp 147w looks like this is the amount watts consumed at the adjusted voltage or am i wrong?

Freddy are you on I7 platform too? U seem to know quite much about this.

isnt that just the factory clocks specifications? what does it have to do with the actual numbers i see in core temp. I mean tdp on intel is 130w and in coretemp 147w looks like this is the amount watts consumed at the adjusted voltage or am i wrong?

Freddy are you on I7 platform too? U seem to know quite much about this.

an this is what i found on intel site.
Tcase 67.9°C
Max TDP 130 Watts
Core Voltage 0.800V-1.225V

isnt that just the factory clocks specifications? what does it have to do with the actual numbers i see in core temp. I mean tdp on intel is 130w and in coretemp 147w looks like this is the amount watts consumed at the adjusted voltage or am i wrong?

Freddy are you on I7 platform too? U seem to know quite much about this.[/quote]
Those Core temps from V99.4 are a lot closer to your e-leet temps if you trust those are correct. Again, your load temps are way to high. You need to keep your Core temps at or below Tcase under 100% load. Loading the CPU with prime is peaking TDP. Therefore keep your core temps below 67.9C @ max TDP. You need way better cooling for OCing plain and simple. Your factory cooler is not cutting it. The whole point of overclocking is to keep the temperatures at, or below factory spec eventhough your over volting. The moment you do this, your warrantee is null, and void from Intel. Your excited about OCing, but your equipment is not prepaired to take it on.

Intel does not design our CPU's to be OC'ed, and cover them under warrantee. Their maximum specification, in your case, 67.9C @ 130W is the most intel will warrantee @ factory clock. There are aftermarket coolers we can purchase to keep the temperature under control eventhough we decide to run higher watts through our CPU's. CPU temperature utilities use the TJmax "spec" to calibrate the utilities. Unfortunately, Intel doesn't provide this TJmax spec, or the spec is arbitrary at best. Everybody tries to determine this TJmax, but not everyone agrees what it truely is. I play to the more conservative end of this calibration, and set my utility to 100C for my CPU eventhough some think its 95C, or 105C. Your cpu is exceeding the maximum wattage, and the maximum tempertuare, not good. You need a better cooler to bring the core temperatures down to, or below max Tcase spec or 67.9C @ max TDP, or whatever watts you choose to run you CPU. I can't make it any clearer than that.

If you want to get the skinny on the TJunction, and temperature, here read this.
[url="http://www.alcpu.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=392"]http://www.alcpu.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=392[/url]

And no. I am running what,s in my sig a Q6600 B3 2 core quad which has a different spec than your cpu.

isnt that just the factory clocks specifications? what does it have to do with the actual numbers i see in core temp. I mean tdp on intel is 130w and in coretemp 147w looks like this is the amount watts consumed at the adjusted voltage or am i wrong?

Freddy are you on I7 platform too? U seem to know quite much about this.

Those Core temps from V99.4 are a lot closer to your e-leet temps if you trust those are correct. Again, your load temps are way to high. You need to keep your Core temps at or below Tcase under 100% load. Loading the CPU with prime is peaking TDP. Therefore keep your core temps below 67.9C @ max TDP. You need way better cooling for OCing plain and simple. Your factory cooler is not cutting it. The whole point of overclocking is to keep the temperatures at, or below factory spec eventhough your over volting. The moment you do this, your warrantee is null, and void from Intel. Your excited about OCing, but your equipment is not prepaired to take it on.

Intel does not design our CPU's to be OC'ed, and cover them under warrantee. Their maximum specification, in your case, 67.9C @ 130W is the most intel will warrantee @ factory clock. There are aftermarket coolers we can purchase to keep the temperature under control eventhough we decide to run higher watts through our CPU's. CPU temperature utilities use the TJmax "spec" to calibrate the utilities. Unfortunately, Intel doesn't provide this TJmax spec, or the spec is arbitrary at best. Everybody tries to determine this TJmax, but not everyone agrees what it truely is. I play to the more conservative end of this calibration, and set my utility to 100C for my CPU eventhough some think its 95C, or 105C. Your cpu is exceeding the maximum wattage, and the maximum tempertuare, not good. You need a better cooler to bring the core temperatures down to, or below max Tcase spec or 67.9C @ max TDP, or whatever watts you choose to run you CPU. I can't make it any clearer than that.

If you want to get the skinny on the TJunction, and temperature, here read this.

Raptor 150 HDD x2 Raid 0 Stripe 128K. I was just looking into the velociraptor 300gb today. but its expensive $309 does having them in raid 0 worth it? if you got 2 150gb when in raid 0 u will still have 150gb or it doubles?

ohh nvm i found a great article on this.

now ill keep reading lol. see how the hell i setit up.

hm after reading everything im confident about doing this. but 2 things i still have doubt. the 2 HDDs have to be identical. but identical in size and speed or identical in brand also?

so I would do raid 0 since it improves performance. I see up to 16 HDDs can be setup in Raid 0. for each adittional HDD on the array means higher performance? so in example. a raid 0 on 4 HDDs faster than a Raid 0 on 2 HDDs?

Raptor 150 HDD x2 Raid 0 Stripe 128K. I was just looking into the velociraptor 300gb today. but its expensive $309 does having them in raid 0 worth it? if you got 2 150gb when in raid 0 u will still have 150gb or it doubles?

ohh nvm i found a great article on this.

now ill keep reading lol. see how the hell i setit up.

hm after reading everything im confident about doing this. but 2 things i still have doubt. the 2 HDDs have to be identical. but identical in size and speed or identical in brand also?

so I would do raid 0 since it improves performance. I see up to 16 HDDs can be setup in Raid 0. for each adittional HDD on the array means higher performance? so in example. a raid 0 on 4 HDDs faster than a Raid 0 on 2 HDDs?

[quote name='avioni' post='289424' date='Mar 27 2009, 06:08 PM']Raptor 150 HDD x2 Raid 0 Stripe 128K. I was just looking into the velociraptor 300gb today. but its expensive $309 does having them in raid 0 worth it? if you got 2 150gb when in raid 0 u will still have 150gb or it doubles?

ohh nvm i found a great article on this.

now ill keep reading lol. see how the hell i setit up.

hm after reading everything im confident about doing this. but 2 things i still have doubt. the 2 HDDs have to be identical. but identical in size and speed or identical in brand also?

so I would do raid 0 since it improves performance. I see up to 16 HDDs can be setup in Raid 0. for each adittional HDD on the array means higher performance? so in example. a raid 0 on 4 HDDs faster than a Raid 0 on 2 HDDs?[/quote]
This is changing the subject, but if you most know, The allocated useable partition of an 150 raptor is 139GB, Since I use one partition, my partition size is 279GB. Is it fatser? Ya, Id say its little faster, but not incredible.

If you want to learn the facts about RAID, and all its configurations read this.
[url="http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/raid/index.html"]http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref...raid/index.html[/url]

[quote name='avioni' post='289424' date='Mar 27 2009, 06:08 PM']Raptor 150 HDD x2 Raid 0 Stripe 128K. I was just looking into the velociraptor 300gb today. but its expensive $309 does having them in raid 0 worth it? if you got 2 150gb when in raid 0 u will still have 150gb or it doubles?

ohh nvm i found a great article on this.

now ill keep reading lol. see how the hell i setit up.

hm after reading everything im confident about doing this. but 2 things i still have doubt. the 2 HDDs have to be identical. but identical in size and speed or identical in brand also?

so I would do raid 0 since it improves performance. I see up to 16 HDDs can be setup in Raid 0. for each adittional HDD on the array means higher performance? so in example. a raid 0 on 4 HDDs faster than a Raid 0 on 2 HDDs?

This is changing the subject, but if you most know, The allocated useable partition of an 150 raptor is 139GB, Since I use one partition, my partition size is 279GB. Is it fatser? Ya, Id say its little faster, but not incredible.

If you want to learn the facts about RAID, and all its configurations read this.